Inherit The Wind: The Ongoing Clash Between Religion And Art

 

Inherit the Wind is adapted from the play of the same name. It portrays the events of the 1925 Scopes ‘Monkey’ Trial in which a teacher stood trial for violating a state law with his introduction of Evolution to his class’s syllabus.  Although a highly fictionalised account of the real trial, the play, much like Arthur Miller’s The Crucible, served as a harsh condemnation of McCarthyism.  The film version, however, presents a far more damning picture of the fundamentalist Christian community, fuelled by the frothing zealotry of Reverend Jeremiah Brown, in their protests against the prospect of free-thought and scientific progress within the close-knit community.  Unfortunately, the only thing anachronistic about their portrayal is its small-scale, as the battle between fanatical religious factions and freedom of expression within the artistic community rages on.

Barely two months ago, in St. Paul, Minnesota, The New Ulm Actors Community Theatre cancelled their production of Inherit the Wind following strong lobbying from local evangelicals, who objected to its portrayal of the evolution/creationism debate. Almost ninety years after a teacher stood trial for teaching Evolution as an alternative to Creationism, a local theatre buckled under the pressure of even portraying the trials events in a fictitious setting.  The fear of causing offence has never been so prevalent in the artistic community as it is today, and freedom of expression - a privilege above which none other can take precedence - seems to fall short of criticising, questioning, or even openly discussing religion.

Chief amongst this religious objection to the arts is the Catholic Church’s obsession with boycotting anything they find offensive, no matter how tedious the link is to their faith.  The Golden Compass, Harry Potter, The Da Vinci Code and The Passion of the Christ have all fallen foul of their organised boycotts, with even Roger Ebert claiming that their efforts impacted box office results.

Bill Donahue, the head of the Catholic League and Witchfinder General in all matters artistic, has more recently lost some semblance of credibility, having been publically exposed for not actually having seen many of the films and television he claims to be offended by, and the boycotts of which he writes for so passionately. When confronted by comedian Louis CK about his bizarre condemnation of his sitcom Lucky Louie, he admitted that, not only had he not seen the programme, but also that he hadn’t even written the press release condemning it in his name. It must be said that for all their henpeckery, the Christian factions keep their protests relatively peaceful. More extremist sections, such as The Westboro Baptist Church, whilst despicably protesting the funerals of dead soldiers, seem more obsessed with publicity then their dogma.

Films such as The Life of Brian, Dogma and Religulous have all emerged from Christian-dominated societies, whereas anything considered critical against Islam is met with forceful barbarism from fundamental Islamic factions. Whether it is Theo Van Gough, the Dutch filmmaker assassinated for producing Submission, a film that critiscised the treatment of women in Islam; the fatwa issued by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini against author Salman Rushdie for his depiction of Mohammed in The Satanic Verses; the world-wide protests against Nakouala Basseley Nakouala for his film The Innocence of Muslims; or Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard’s survival of an axe attack in his own home, following his illustrations of the prophet Muhammad in the Jyllands-Posten newspaper. Any perceived insult is met with a level or brutality rarely seen with any other matters artistic. 

What remains most discouraging, however, is the lack of vocal condemnation of these attacks.  Writing for Slate in 2006, Christopher Hitchens said “the incredible thing about the ongoing Kristillnacht against Denmark is that it has resulted in, not opprobrium for the religion that perpetrates and excuses it, but increased respectability.” Just why this is remains unclear.  Perhaps we are just one generation too far removed to know true repression of the freedom of speech? Maybe as a society, we have nothing important enough to express that we are willing to risk such violent repercussions for? Maybe the ongoing misconception of Islam as a race rather than a religion deters many from its criticism? Or maybe it is what Michael Gerson brilliant referred to as “the soft bigotry of low expectations”?

In his defence of the teacher on trial, lawyer Henry Drummond (Spencer Tracy) delivers one of Inherit the Wind’s most powerful speeches, exclaiming “Fanaticism and ignorance is forever busy, and needs feeding”.  As such, the conflict between true artistic freedom and religion will likely rage on.  Just as the plays of Aeschylus and Sophocles have long survived the belief in Zeus and Apollo, and wall paintings, sculptures and block statues of Isis, Osiris and Horus far outlived their actual worship, so will artistic endeavor, the free exchange of ideas and the pursuit of complete freedom of expression remain after those religions condemning it have long disappeared. Drummond, continuing with his speech, says: “An idea is a greater monument than a cathedral. And the advance of man's knowledge is a greater miracle than all the sticks turned to snakes or the parting of the waters.”

Inherit the Wind will be shown at Broadway Cinema at 2pm on Sunday 24 November 2013.